[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch
From: |
Miles Bader |
Subject: |
Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch |
Date: |
Tue, 31 Jan 2006 10:51:35 +0900 |
2006/1/30, Kenichi Handa <address@hidden>:
> I thought that the point was to prevent making an incomplete
> tarball. And, for that, it is necessary to detect the case
> where bootstrap failed. The merit of just checking if
> bootstrap was done or not regardless of the result is small,
> isn't it?
Why do you think that? I'd think by far the most common case would be
people who checked out but didn't build (i.e. the easy-to-detect
case).
Emacs does not attempt to do a rigorous up-to-date check anywhere
else, why should it do that here? That's especially true given the
low frequency of changes in unicode data files -- if the generated
files exist at all, they're probably good enough to use for a
snapshot.
-miles
--
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.
- Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch, (continued)
- Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch, Eli Zaretskii, 2006/01/26
- Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch, Kenichi Handa, 2006/01/26
- Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch, Eli Zaretskii, 2006/01/27
- Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch, Kenichi Handa, 2006/01/27
- Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch, Richard M. Stallman, 2006/01/28
- Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch, Kenichi Handa, 2006/01/29
- Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch, Richard M. Stallman, 2006/01/29
- Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch, Kenichi Handa, 2006/01/30
- Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch, Eli Zaretskii, 2006/01/30
- Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch, Kenichi Handa, 2006/01/30
- Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch,
Miles Bader <=
- Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch, Richard M. Stallman, 2006/01/31
- Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch, Richard M. Stallman, 2006/01/28
- Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch, Emfox Zhou, 2006/01/20
- Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch, Zhang Wei, 2006/01/20